The unions surely received a major message from Tuesday's recall primary. Their candidate not only got thumped badly by Tom Barrett but Gov. Walker got more votes than Barrett and Falk combined. In fact, he got nearly as many votes as all four Democratic candidates despite having a primary opponent of his own and despite the fact that many Republicans crossed over in an attempt to screw up the Democratic primary vote. Unions, especially public employee unions, don't have the clout they used to. I think there are an awful lot of people in Wisconsin who, even if they disagree with Walker, feel like I do, that recalls are for criminals like the guys doing time in Illinois. Trying to recall Gov. Walker is a waste of tax dollars and time. Wait for the next general election if you don't like him. Walker wins in June.

I'd bet a lot of the union members voted for Barrett as well. That's already been shown to be the case in Dane county.

And I wouldn't be quite so quick to claim Walker isn't like his cohorts in Illinois. A number of people that worked in the same office as he did are already charged with felonies and he's created, and transferred money into, a criminal defense fund. Don't be too surprised if charges are brought up even closer to home. The truly funny thing about the whole criminal charges situation is that while campaigning he claimed Doyle should have resigned because someone in one of the state departments was charged (which were later dismissed). Now people in the same office are charged but he doesn't take any responsibility.

I'll also go on record here with my prediction. If Walker survives the recall and maintains majority, a proposal will pass within the next year requiring that Creationism be bought as a possible alternative to Evolution in all public schools. This will be pushed through because scientifically evolution is just a theory, despite the fact that scientifically magnetism is also just a theory. Creationism falls closer to the hypotheses definition scientifically.

You're ignoring the whole point. Unions – especially public unions – don't hold the clout they used to and the general public don't like single-issue recalls unless it's a criminal or immoral matter. If it's a matter of political disagreement, wait till the next general election like you're supposed to. Save the taxpayers a lot of money and all the junk mail, stupid TV commercials and robo calls.

We've all heard you make the argument many times that a recall should only be done when someone has done something illegal, the basis I'm sure for your argument above that we should, "Wait for the next general election if you don't like him."

However, a little research shows the authors of Wisconsin's constitution were very deliberate. If you look at the impeachment power it clearly states that it must be on the grounds of "corrupt conduct" or "crimes and misdemeanors". The wording of recalls includes no such restrictions and even includes wording that no law may be enacted to hamper, resist or impair the right of recall.

Many of our Founding Fathers very much believed that representatives could, and would go against the will of the people, and therefor should be removed. See the quote below from George Washington in 1787:

The power under the [federal] Constitution will always be in the People. It is entrusted for certain defined purposes, and for a certain limited period, to representatives of their own chusing; and whenever it is executed contrary to their Interest, or not agreeable to their wishes, their Servants can, and undoubtedly will be, recalled.

And in response to those claiming we'll just recall everyone every year. There are two protections in the constitution already to help prevent this. First, it takes a large number of signatures to trigger a recall. Second, once someone has been recalled, they can't be recalled again during the remainder of their term. The number of signatures has already proven a tough burden, just ask those trying to recall the Democrat for the mining vote. And if you want to make it even harder to trigger a recall, help work to get more people to vote, it will raise the threshold even higher.

If recalls were only meant for crimes, etc. then the entire recall process is redundant and could have been left out of the constitution as the impeachment process could have been used to remove those representatives. Why bother adding this amendment in 1926 if there was already a process?

And as far as the "cost" of the recall election. It's estimated that the recall could cost as much as $17 million. Considering Walker has raised $14.9 million from out of state sources (about 60% of all of his funding and despite commercials criticizing "out of state influence"). I'm sure the Democrats and Unions will bring in at least a few million as well, then throw in the Super PACs, etc. and a lot more than $17 million is going to come into the state.

Now, lets consider the ads run in your own newspaper talking about how money circulates when spent in a small town. I don't remember the exact numbers but isn't it something like 7 times that that money circulates? Based on that this election should be over a $100 million boost to Wisconsin's economy. Not to mention the significant number of jobs created in the state to run a campaign.

So far, this recall has been the single most successful thing Walker has done for Wisconsin's economy since taking office!

Interestingly, Walker has already said he's opposed to any 'right to work' proposal (just last week). And as far as money paid to our newspaper on recall campaigns, we've received little more than ballots postings which is all tax paid – stuff I still consider a waste of money for taxpayers. I still say the recall is a one issue campaign that's going nowhere after the voters saw how much they've saved in property taxes because of Walker's dealing with public unions. Barely two-thirds of the petitions signers showed up to vote in the primary and I doubt that many will vote June 5. Walker will win again.

Walker proposed "right to work" legislation in 1993 at a state legislator. Seems to me if you propose a bill you are probably a supporter of that bill's content. Also, when asked if he would veto any "right to work" legislation that ended up on his desk, he has refused to give a straight answer.

Finally, I know he claims he doesn't support "right to work" legislation to the press, but the 2 facts above mean he's either a flip-flopper or he's lying. Based on the fact that he claimed getting rid of collective bargaining rights was needed to fix the budget and was not "union busting" (a lie - especially after the new video showing him talking about busting unions with his billionaire donor), I am 100% positive he's lying.

And, I don't think this is a one issue campaign. It's going to be about ethics, personal integrity, and the economy. Walker is not ethical, has no personal integrity, and is driving jobs from Wisconsin.

Walker also said (on video) that he would work with the unions to get the budget cuts needed just before the last election. That would be very shortly before explaining his "Divide and Conquer" plan to his largest supporter. Based on his track record, I'd say he's going to say what ever he thinks the people support to get elected and then do what ever his rich supporters really want him to do.

Also, believe it or not, you have received money from the Barrett campaign at a minimum and possibly the Walker campaign as well. This website uses a banner ad supplier to fill the spots the sales reps don't sell. I've seen a large number of Barrett banners on the site and I believe at least a couple of Walker ads. It may not amount to a whole lot but you have benefited.

Finally, as mentioned before, ads in this paper have talked about how money spent locally amounts to a much larger increase for the region because those businesses spend that money again, etc. Shouldn't the same thing work for all of Wisconsin? Even if it doesn't surely as such a consistent conservative and adamant supporter of Walker and his beliefs and proposals you must believe in the trickle down effect so eventually that money will make it's way from the wealthy large media corporations to your wallet...

As Larry said Kerry, (And you're talking about WHICH political candidate...?)

Well of course he's talking about 1/2 of all political candidates - republicans, duh.

Once a person gets that ingrained into an idea or political cause it becomes like a religon. All ability to reason criticaly is gone. The other side is wrong in each and every aspect. Even the ability to realize that a cadidates support of resurrection of public unions is a political catastrophe is gone.

Wow, River Rat, it's amazing how well you know me. The fact that you know I automatically disagree with all Republicans is amazing! Some fun facts for you before you assume you know anything about me in the future.

I lean conservative.I tend to vote republican more often than not.I voted for Walker the first time.I would not have done so if he had stated what his true intentions for the state were or if I had know how much of a fanatic he really is.I absolutely can't wait to correct my mistake!

It couldn't possibly be that your viewpoint is the one that's incorrect either could it???

So it's only Republicans who lie, huh. Well, I have news for somebody. Yes, I vote Republican mostly...NOW. But in the early 1970s I was caucus coordinator for the Wisconsin state senate DEMOCRATIC caucus. I was also Lt. Gov. Martin Schreiber's first speech writer, also a DEMOCRAT. I was also a staff aide to State Senator Dale McKenna, yet another DEMOCRAT. And I was on George McGovern's Wisconsin campaign staff when he ran for president, as you may recall, another DEMOCRAT. As I grew older and a little wiser I learned that all that taking money out of my pocket to pay for somebody else's gimmicks that never worked was a bunch of garbage. Yes, the GOP has some garbage of it's own but not nearly so much as the Democrats do. At least they're not stealing it out of my pocket every time I turn around.

Larry Tobin wrote:So it's only Republicans who lie, huh. Well, I have news for somebody. Yes, I vote Republican mostly...NOW. But in the early 1970s I was caucus coordinator for the Wisconsin state senate DEMOCRATIC caucus. I was also Lt. Gov. Martin Schreiber's first speech writer, also a DEMOCRAT. I was also a staff aide to State Senator Dale McKenna, yet another DEMOCRAT. And I was on George McGovern's Wisconsin campaign staff when he ran for president, as you may recall, another DEMOCRAT. As I grew older and a little wiser I learned that all that taking money out of my pocket to pay for somebody else's gimmicks that never worked was a bunch of garbage. Yes, the GOP has some garbage of it's own but not nearly so much as the Democrats do. At least they're not stealing it out of my pocket every time I turn around.

Well Kerry is a self-proclamed conservative and mostly votes for republicans so I'm sure he'll agree with this 100%. He a Walker hating republican who supports tax-and-spend LOL!

River Rat, once again, stop trying to put words in my mouth or assuming you know anything about my views. Feel free to voice your own opinions on issues, but do not assume you have my permission to state mine!

As for some of the other comments. I totally agree both parties (and just about everyone else) lie. But, blatantly saying one thing to the voting public when you have every intention of doing the exact opposite is pushing past a line. I fully agree politicians regularly voice support for things they know aren't likely to pass, support lofty goals, or simply declare support for ideas they later learn aren't feasible. However, Walker has gone above and beyond these simple exaggerations. Walker's flat out lies match up much more closely with statements from a few previous presidents. 'I'm not a crook" and "I didn't have sexual relations with that woman" both come to mind. These were both out and out lies to the electorate and both deserved punishment. Walker's blatant lies and my way or the highway methods deserve the same.

I've never said I agree with tax and spend. Personally, for Wisconsin I think we needed to do a number of things. There needed to be cuts, we didn't need to provide additional tax breaks that only went to a few select groups (there's a great way to fix a broken budget, give away more money). We shouldn't be turning down federal grants for things we are likely going to have to pay for anyway (turning away millions of dollars to start setting up the health exchanges was foolish, even if the law is overturned we could have created jobs in Wisconsin and if it isn't the federal government will now run Wisconsin's exchanges). The cuts should have been more spread out (why were "favored" groups protected from the cuts, which is what made portions of the law illegal?). Why was education the hardest hit when Wisconsin's universities are teaching more students and help generate money for our economy? And yes, we should have looked at some possible tax increases, fee increases or reducing tax loopholes. For example, why did Walker's biggest supporter's business not pay taxes in Wisconsin for at least three years despite making large profits???